Hello Fences and windows
I still think you'd make an excellent administrator, and I would like to repeat my offer to nominate you for that position.— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 21:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
<--Good luck! cheers. - Spaceman Spiff 20:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Good deal - you're nearly at 100, with barely an oppose. That's a lot of community trust! :) BOZ ( talk) 14:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Reubzz and I have opened up this mediation cabal case that lists you as a party. Please indicate your acceptance of the mediation process on my talk page and on the case page so we can move quickly towards discussion and resolution of the dispute. The proceedings cannot start unless ALL parties agree to accept the mediation process.
Cheers! Reubzz ( talk) 14:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Cheers! Reubzz ( talk) 20:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Technocrane what about a merge with Crane shot ? Off2riorob ( talk) 21:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to inform all parties in the MedCabal case involving the article Race and Intelligence, that the deadline for any final comments in this introductory stage of mediation is due within the next 24 hours. At the end of this timeframe, the Mediators will seek page protection for 48 hours to review the entire case and prepare a schedule of issues to discuss to proceed forward. Thank You for your cooperation and acting in good faith to pursue a conclusion to this dispute. Cheers! -- Reubzz ( talk) 02:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
You have made a charge against me in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (events) that I am assuming bad faith in what I said there. I am assuming good faith in that you are trying to write a usable guideline. I however, think you have made many errors in it. How is that assuming bad faith? DGG ( talk ) 15:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I won't be on Wikipedia again till Sunday. Fences& Windows 15:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
…has demonstrated that the community feels that you are able to use the wikipedia maintenance tools to help the project, congratulations! If you have not already, please take a look at Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators, Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide, and similar pages, and feel free to ask any one of us for advice. Congratulations again. -- Avi ( talk) 21:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on having your RfA passed! Now get out your flamethrower and work! work! work! :-) — Oli OR Pyfan! 21:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! Another excellent admin to add to the group! Frmatt ( talk) 21:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Woohoo! :)— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 21:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. I hope I'll fulfil the trust placed in me, and I'll take things slowly! Fences& Windows 22:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! Location ( talk) 23:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations and well deserved! -- AFriedman (talk) 02:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! And good luck with the tools. Tim meh 03:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Well done! I know you'll be a great asset! Ged UK 08:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on your successful RfA! Now that you have the tools I'll let you in on an admin secret, sort of akin to the Konami Code. Here's what you do: delete your user page, then undelete, then delete again, then undelete, then protect your talk page, then unprotect, then block an anonymous vandal for 24 hours based on an AIV report, then close an AfD as "no consensus" with a 37-word rationale (be sure not to use hyphens). After completing this series of actions a man wearing a kilt and a cowboy hat will suddenly appear out of nowhere right there in front of you and offer you a giant steaming mug of coffee. Whatever you do don't drink it, because the guy makes absolutely terrible coffee, and quite frankly you'll be lucky if you can convince him to just go away and leave you alone without going on and on about how much trouble he took to bring you the stuff. Look, I didn't say it was a good secret. -- Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 09:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy: |
|
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL. |
Hi! I noticed that you baleeted some information added to the Neanderthal article based on the book mentioned on http://www.themandus.org You don't consider this theory popular or useful?-- 69.196.131.216 ( talk) 02:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats too. You deserve it. Shadowjams ( talk) 09:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 19:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I've realised I've jumped the gun by a few hours on some closes, it wasn't intentional and I'll be careful to avoid it in future. If an admin feels that slightly early closes will have biased the outcome, please reopen. Fences& Windows 17:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for replying a bit late, was out of the town and just got back...Surkhailis are a big branch of the Swatis of Hazara division majority of them residing in the town of Baffa, if you have any doubt then you better visit a famous book called The "history of Hazara" by Dr Sher Bahadur Khan panni, further I will recommend you to see couple of books of british author as "Hazara Gazetteer", those were being written in 1887 and 1907 when pashtuns and their allies struggling for freedom against Britishers. Take care! Haider ( talk) 10:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
You marked an issue on the ANI noticeboard as resolved. I have taken the liberty of reversing that in light of emergent information. I thought you should know. Crafty ( talk) 08:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 November 29
Hello Fences, You left a message on Dapi89's page saying "We have to be civil with editors we neither like nor respect, without letting them bait us." I am curious, are you suggesting that I am baiting Dapi89? If so, could you point to exactly what I said that made you think so? Thanks, Steel2009 ( talk) 01:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you've just closed this as Merge, on the grounds that "the bulk of editors support a merge". Can I point out that four editors suggested Merge... And four editors suggested Keep.
I suggest that you might want to go with 'no consensus' on this instead? I'm likely to take this to review otherwise. -- Barberio ( talk) 00:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Just read your argument in defence on the DRV that "The only argument for keep was 'he won an award'". I'd like to draw your attention to this diff - [2] - and point out that is a separate argument based on citation of notability by sourcing. Will you reconsider now? -- Barberio ( talk) 01:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Thomas K. Dye. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Following your deletion of my comment, I again request you to resign, your handling of this issue has caused disruption. You are a new administrator, and should have avoided controversy in your first actions, but have apparently courted it. -- Barberio ( talk) 02:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Why did you close an AfD that had just been relisted less than 6 hours previous to see if consensus could be reached? Policy/guidelines say it should be relisted and moved to the current date, which means spend more than 6 hours to try to gain consensus. [3]
And it's not a total split on keep/delete, it's very obvious toward keep. Did you close the wrong debate, you were looking at something else then closed this one? -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 00:28, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I see that you made a POV about medals being placed on userpages. I managed to take a look on User:Zaferk's blanked userpage, and judging from the debate the policy on medals is not a new rule. It has been policed in Wikipedia since 2008. - Boeing7107isdelicious| SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN 02:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you but wanted to point out that there is not a WP:WRITER. (I think it is funny and an easy mistake to make so don't worry about it too much). Cptnono ( talk) 02:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
"or whatever" was because I couldn't remember if WP:Civil redirects to the civility policy or not and didn't feel like checking, relax. Yzak Jule ( talk) 03:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
I commented at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lexiecreator/Cassie cleans up, and removed a speedy tag that had been added in error to the MfD page. - Eastmain ( talk) 14:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Look at this and see if we can move this into the mainspace. Extremepro ( talk) 00:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
While acknowledging that many were involved, I'd like to commend you (little though my commendation might be worth) for your work on the Events Notability guideline. I think it is a terrific addition, and successfully whacks all the troublesome mole-issues. -- Jaymax ( talk) 07:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Hear, hear! BTW, I saw your comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wuwang Club fire: "The guideline WP:GNG clashes explicitly with the policy WP:NOTNEWS, and the guideline WP:EVENT attempts to resolve this dichotomy by laying out the principles by which we judge whether an event is notable." I think that is an awesome summary of WP:EVENT and I would support its additional into the guideline. Thoughts on where to put it? Location ( talk) 05:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Do you want to merge them since we both opened one up on Bravedog? Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I merged them. Feel free to do what you want to it. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
You might want to comment at the SPI that you helped initiate with me and Daniel as it is getting pretty interesting over there. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 00:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I owe you an apology, there's more to this than I was aware of and I'm sorry for the "paranoid" comment. Regards, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 22:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Nice work on putting together the evidence for the Kils SPI case. While we've had differences of opinion in the past, I can't help but admire all of the great work you've done for Wikipedia. Congrats also on your much-deserved promotion to adminship. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow. Granted, the Rutherford/ DC "physics" link was a bit suspicious... but where was their SPI? — Sizzle Flambé ( ☎/ ✍) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know that I ended up responded to your post in very short order quite by accident since I was in the middle of trying to re-summarize the situation as a whole anyway. Since I honestly don't know how other editors think about these matters, I very rarely "want" an XfD matter to close as delete unless it's a complete abomination that fell through the cracks. I much rather see something grow and survive, but in most cases there are only 1-2 other editors involved and action is a lot simpler, I may speak with them directly and I wasn't figuring this would grab this many replies. Not an hour ago a random editor came along and vastly improved an article out of the blue and I closed for speedy/snow keep per nominator as all other comments had been on 'keep' and zero other concerns raised.. I admit, in some cases I could stand to work on the articles myself, but in this case I ran out of objective directions after realizing the lack of US Census info, and in the prior I'd closed I found I had an accidental PoV conflict with that article since evidence I collected regarding a main contributor of that article was later placed in relation to a block of that user. Okay, that's sounded more complex than it is, but key being I do as best I can to think things through at length before I decide to act on anything at all. I'll have this page watched for the duration of the AfD, so if you have any issues you'd like me to address in particular, please feel free to ask. I'm certainly sorry if I'm taking up extemporaneous amounts of your time on this... Cheers~ ♪ daTheisen (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
That was a funny article! But I deleted the comment in consideration of the user's dignity. He's had a hard enough day. Jehochman Talk 20:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
"the lone deletion argument doesn't hold any weight"? Tim Song ( talk) 23:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
They are all single persons. I will bring written proof, that I received the HEISENBERG AWARD and the 500 000 VOLKSWAGEN FOUNDATION PRIZE, an EB-1 invitation for my whole family, and a book cited 115 times - http://www.ecoscope.com/biomass3.htm - another chapter in book http://www.ecoscope.com/polarbe2.htm, another http://www.ecoscope.com/naturwie.htm . We will obey to the restricktions - Uwe Kils 09:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
But not by me. Please close it. I promised already that we will only use the kils account in the future and that nobody is allowed to work on my IP or machine or name and that I will obey the restrictions. I meant it only good giving information of our UHSE ELITE UNIVERSITY into the public domain, but we have all also on our servers. I have never seen a person behaving like user:cert, not even giving his scientiffic background. I did not "Canvas", I only asked to vote. Nothing else. Uwe Kils 15:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Ta. Peridon ( talk) 18:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
per http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FDiana_Napolis&action=historysubmit&diff=330541616&oldid=330517997, could you provide me with the url where the canvassing was taking place? the point is moot now, as the article has been deleted, but it might undergo deletion review so evidence of canvassing might prove useful. thanks Theserialcomma ( talk) 18:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I was hoping you could take a look at this deletion debate. Someone has written a message claiming the information in the article is libelous (which is stretching it a bit), but I think the debate has mostly run its course, with established editors weighing in with policy, and mainly SPA's providing opinions to keep. Angryapathy ( talk) 19:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you deleted For Fuel Freedom, Inc. because a patent was suppossedly self-promoted. A patent may be written by the inventor or their attorney, but they do happen to go through a more thorough editing and review process than books, and are reviewed by patent examiners with stringent guidelines. And unlike books, that process can take years to review not months. The changes that come about are certainly nothing like what was originally submitted. That is not a "self-published" definition. Please restore the page. EmmettLBrown ( talk) 10:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Novell Forge Password Management Servlets was closed as delete. The page was moved to Password Management Servlets during the AfD. You deleted the redirect but not the content. Can you fix this please by deleting Password Management Servlets? I am sorry for you that this got confused. Thanks for looking into it. Miami33139 ( talk) 19:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
The weekly Policy Report in the Signpost features community feedback on policy pages; see for instance here, here and here. We're putting together another one for the Signpost 9 days from now at WT:Consensus#Signpost Policy Report. I'm asking for your participation because you made an edit within the last two months at that talk page, but all responses are welcome. I'm not watchlisting, so if you have questions or comments, please drop a note at the policy talk page or my user page. Thanks for your time. - Dank ( push to talk) 16:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nathan Keyes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. As an aside, the DRV request was placed on the talkpage of the AfD, you might want to speedy it. treelo radda 18:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Micro 101 here, could you please tell me what I did wrong in my merge? Also, how did you get your user boxes in that handy little window? METAL MAN ( talk) 21:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Hello Fences, I was wondering where you got those pictures and how you put them in your user boxes, please reply at my discussion page here: METAL MAN ( talk) 21:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Sorry about the inadvertent deletion of your comments! No clue how that happened... -- Crusio ( talk) 19:14, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
It's still hanging on at es:wp, despite the propb having expired. Probably not important in this case, but I note that you didn't inform the creator - it's {{subst:Aviso propb|nombre de articulo}} ~~~~ for future reference, if you ever make your way back over there.
Incidentally, looking at old Papa November and Verbal SPIs I notice that you seem to have escaped being accused - I hope you didn't feel left out, probably would have happened eventually. pablo hablo. 23:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the advice on where to get the pictures for the user boxes, but next time can you reply on my page? Thanks! :) Micro 101 ( talk) 00:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Ret.Prof (
talk)
00:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
Hi, If you peruse the Wikispace, you will see that there are pictures in a number of articles, either to illustrate a point, or to add humour. This suggests that there is a consensus that some pictures are OK. Sorry for the controversial picture. I was looking for a reconciliation picture, and the cartoon appeared to show reconciliation. OnBeyondZebrax ( talk) 14:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC) -::Hi,I don't believe I did the Mary Pickford film poster of the two kids beating each other up. Nevertheless, I have put a number of pictures up to illustrate points. Why are you against pictures? Do you think it cheapens the discussion? Other editors seem to agree with the idea of illustrating the Wikispace.
Nice work on narcissism. I dont know if you noticed this : User_talk:AGEdmunds Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Psychology/Self_and_Identity -- Penbat ( talk) 22:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Narcissism is mentioned in bullying article. Narcissism is only in the Bullying template as a related topic. Many bullies are narcissistic. However unfortunately the scientific literature for bullying and narcissism is usually separate and bullying is more of a social construct anyway. -- Penbat ( talk) 23:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC) ( edit conflict):I could tell that was new material. It's a very bitty article generally, it needs some more flow, more coherence, but I don't know enough on the subject to do it myself. Btw, I removed the bullying category, as there's no text in the article to support the connection, but I see from a quick look at the literature that the two are connected, e.g. work by Dieter Zapf. It'd be good to include in the article. Fences& Windows 23:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I mean it ... oddest closure I've seen in weeks. Tx for being principle-based, and crossing the aisle on the del review.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 20:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, Fences & Windows, for your astute opinion and careful work on the Charles J. Fisher and the Charles J. Fisher AfD pages. I will try to update the references according to the LA Times search link you provided. A gold star to you. Wikigratia ( talk) 01:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 14#Category:International Christian Leadership. The category is similar to Category:Members of the Family also known as the Fellowship which you recently commented on. -- Kevinkor2 ( talk) 09:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
What are the advantages/disadvantages to choosing one over the others? I have some ideas regarding that, but others have probably written out theirs already somewhere(s). There's at least one vulnerable stub in the mainspace and a couple deleted articles I'd like the opportunity to review sometime, and I'm not sure where they would best be pondered and worked on. Also, can articles in the mainspace be userfied or incubated w/o going through AfD? Шизомби ( talk) 13:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The Wordsmith
Communicate is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks for supporting my opinion so strongly at the ANI discussion on Shepherd. But I don't actually think it's correct that if I vote to delete , the article is usually hopeless If people thought this way, it would put me in a position of having a practical veto in the subject concerned, and that is not fair to the principle of consensus. What I think it much more sensible to say, and I know is actually what you meant, is that one is convinced by my arguments, not impressed by my predisposition or authority. I am more inclusionist than the average in some subjects, including PROFs in the humanities. and I suppose he can be classified as such. But there are others where I am often more deletionist than the consensus, and that includes non-fiction non-academic books and their writers--which is also relevant here.
I mean this as only a friendly note. I am very glad you ended the foolish AfD & got rid of the article, rather than have another 10 days of nonsense. But you can realize that this sort of thing can end by my being marginalized. DGG ( talk ) 05:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
You seem to like userboxes. Do you by any chance use Windows under duress, or are you a happy camper? {{User OS:Windows Duress}} -- Slashme ( talk)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall. Best Wishes for the Holidays, Jusdafax 06:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
A Nobody
My talk is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 16:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
There's no question which statement caught your attention. For your convenience, it was added here here, then moderated (a bit) here. If either the edit or its revision is actionable, by either statutory or Wikipedia standards, then you'll want those references handy.
I don't know if the revision will be allowed to stand, but for now at least the Google bots have fewer bad words to index. If the statements that concern you precede it in the discussion, though, then I'm afraid they will have to stand until the page is blanked. Yappy2bhere ( talk) 11:42, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Micro 101 here to wish you, Fences and Windows, a very safe, fun, and relaxing new year! What's your resolution?
-- Micro101 ( talk) 15:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
You try and be nice and thats what you get, thanks. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:01, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I've asked for a review of my block of COM at Wikipedia:Ani#Block_review_please. Happy New Year. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Fences and windows
I still think you'd make an excellent administrator, and I would like to repeat my offer to nominate you for that position.— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 21:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
<--Good luck! cheers. - Spaceman Spiff 20:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Good deal - you're nearly at 100, with barely an oppose. That's a lot of community trust! :) BOZ ( talk) 14:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Reubzz and I have opened up this mediation cabal case that lists you as a party. Please indicate your acceptance of the mediation process on my talk page and on the case page so we can move quickly towards discussion and resolution of the dispute. The proceedings cannot start unless ALL parties agree to accept the mediation process.
Cheers! Reubzz ( talk) 14:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Cheers! Reubzz ( talk) 20:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Technocrane what about a merge with Crane shot ? Off2riorob ( talk) 21:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to inform all parties in the MedCabal case involving the article Race and Intelligence, that the deadline for any final comments in this introductory stage of mediation is due within the next 24 hours. At the end of this timeframe, the Mediators will seek page protection for 48 hours to review the entire case and prepare a schedule of issues to discuss to proceed forward. Thank You for your cooperation and acting in good faith to pursue a conclusion to this dispute. Cheers! -- Reubzz ( talk) 02:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
You have made a charge against me in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (events) that I am assuming bad faith in what I said there. I am assuming good faith in that you are trying to write a usable guideline. I however, think you have made many errors in it. How is that assuming bad faith? DGG ( talk ) 15:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I won't be on Wikipedia again till Sunday. Fences& Windows 15:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
…has demonstrated that the community feels that you are able to use the wikipedia maintenance tools to help the project, congratulations! If you have not already, please take a look at Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators, Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide, and similar pages, and feel free to ask any one of us for advice. Congratulations again. -- Avi ( talk) 21:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on having your RfA passed! Now get out your flamethrower and work! work! work! :-) — Oli OR Pyfan! 21:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! Another excellent admin to add to the group! Frmatt ( talk) 21:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Woohoo! :)— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 21:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. I hope I'll fulfil the trust placed in me, and I'll take things slowly! Fences& Windows 22:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! Location ( talk) 23:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations and well deserved! -- AFriedman (talk) 02:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! And good luck with the tools. Tim meh 03:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Well done! I know you'll be a great asset! Ged UK 08:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on your successful RfA! Now that you have the tools I'll let you in on an admin secret, sort of akin to the Konami Code. Here's what you do: delete your user page, then undelete, then delete again, then undelete, then protect your talk page, then unprotect, then block an anonymous vandal for 24 hours based on an AIV report, then close an AfD as "no consensus" with a 37-word rationale (be sure not to use hyphens). After completing this series of actions a man wearing a kilt and a cowboy hat will suddenly appear out of nowhere right there in front of you and offer you a giant steaming mug of coffee. Whatever you do don't drink it, because the guy makes absolutely terrible coffee, and quite frankly you'll be lucky if you can convince him to just go away and leave you alone without going on and on about how much trouble he took to bring you the stuff. Look, I didn't say it was a good secret. -- Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 09:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy: |
|
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL. |
Hi! I noticed that you baleeted some information added to the Neanderthal article based on the book mentioned on http://www.themandus.org You don't consider this theory popular or useful?-- 69.196.131.216 ( talk) 02:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats too. You deserve it. Shadowjams ( talk) 09:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 19:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I've realised I've jumped the gun by a few hours on some closes, it wasn't intentional and I'll be careful to avoid it in future. If an admin feels that slightly early closes will have biased the outcome, please reopen. Fences& Windows 17:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for replying a bit late, was out of the town and just got back...Surkhailis are a big branch of the Swatis of Hazara division majority of them residing in the town of Baffa, if you have any doubt then you better visit a famous book called The "history of Hazara" by Dr Sher Bahadur Khan panni, further I will recommend you to see couple of books of british author as "Hazara Gazetteer", those were being written in 1887 and 1907 when pashtuns and their allies struggling for freedom against Britishers. Take care! Haider ( talk) 10:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
You marked an issue on the ANI noticeboard as resolved. I have taken the liberty of reversing that in light of emergent information. I thought you should know. Crafty ( talk) 08:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 November 29
Hello Fences, You left a message on Dapi89's page saying "We have to be civil with editors we neither like nor respect, without letting them bait us." I am curious, are you suggesting that I am baiting Dapi89? If so, could you point to exactly what I said that made you think so? Thanks, Steel2009 ( talk) 01:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you've just closed this as Merge, on the grounds that "the bulk of editors support a merge". Can I point out that four editors suggested Merge... And four editors suggested Keep.
I suggest that you might want to go with 'no consensus' on this instead? I'm likely to take this to review otherwise. -- Barberio ( talk) 00:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Just read your argument in defence on the DRV that "The only argument for keep was 'he won an award'". I'd like to draw your attention to this diff - [2] - and point out that is a separate argument based on citation of notability by sourcing. Will you reconsider now? -- Barberio ( talk) 01:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Thomas K. Dye. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Following your deletion of my comment, I again request you to resign, your handling of this issue has caused disruption. You are a new administrator, and should have avoided controversy in your first actions, but have apparently courted it. -- Barberio ( talk) 02:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Why did you close an AfD that had just been relisted less than 6 hours previous to see if consensus could be reached? Policy/guidelines say it should be relisted and moved to the current date, which means spend more than 6 hours to try to gain consensus. [3]
And it's not a total split on keep/delete, it's very obvious toward keep. Did you close the wrong debate, you were looking at something else then closed this one? -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 00:28, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I see that you made a POV about medals being placed on userpages. I managed to take a look on User:Zaferk's blanked userpage, and judging from the debate the policy on medals is not a new rule. It has been policed in Wikipedia since 2008. - Boeing7107isdelicious| SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN 02:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you but wanted to point out that there is not a WP:WRITER. (I think it is funny and an easy mistake to make so don't worry about it too much). Cptnono ( talk) 02:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
"or whatever" was because I couldn't remember if WP:Civil redirects to the civility policy or not and didn't feel like checking, relax. Yzak Jule ( talk) 03:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
I commented at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lexiecreator/Cassie cleans up, and removed a speedy tag that had been added in error to the MfD page. - Eastmain ( talk) 14:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Look at this and see if we can move this into the mainspace. Extremepro ( talk) 00:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
While acknowledging that many were involved, I'd like to commend you (little though my commendation might be worth) for your work on the Events Notability guideline. I think it is a terrific addition, and successfully whacks all the troublesome mole-issues. -- Jaymax ( talk) 07:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Hear, hear! BTW, I saw your comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wuwang Club fire: "The guideline WP:GNG clashes explicitly with the policy WP:NOTNEWS, and the guideline WP:EVENT attempts to resolve this dichotomy by laying out the principles by which we judge whether an event is notable." I think that is an awesome summary of WP:EVENT and I would support its additional into the guideline. Thoughts on where to put it? Location ( talk) 05:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Do you want to merge them since we both opened one up on Bravedog? Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I merged them. Feel free to do what you want to it. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
You might want to comment at the SPI that you helped initiate with me and Daniel as it is getting pretty interesting over there. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 00:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I owe you an apology, there's more to this than I was aware of and I'm sorry for the "paranoid" comment. Regards, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 22:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Nice work on putting together the evidence for the Kils SPI case. While we've had differences of opinion in the past, I can't help but admire all of the great work you've done for Wikipedia. Congrats also on your much-deserved promotion to adminship. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow. Granted, the Rutherford/ DC "physics" link was a bit suspicious... but where was their SPI? — Sizzle Flambé ( ☎/ ✍) 04:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know that I ended up responded to your post in very short order quite by accident since I was in the middle of trying to re-summarize the situation as a whole anyway. Since I honestly don't know how other editors think about these matters, I very rarely "want" an XfD matter to close as delete unless it's a complete abomination that fell through the cracks. I much rather see something grow and survive, but in most cases there are only 1-2 other editors involved and action is a lot simpler, I may speak with them directly and I wasn't figuring this would grab this many replies. Not an hour ago a random editor came along and vastly improved an article out of the blue and I closed for speedy/snow keep per nominator as all other comments had been on 'keep' and zero other concerns raised.. I admit, in some cases I could stand to work on the articles myself, but in this case I ran out of objective directions after realizing the lack of US Census info, and in the prior I'd closed I found I had an accidental PoV conflict with that article since evidence I collected regarding a main contributor of that article was later placed in relation to a block of that user. Okay, that's sounded more complex than it is, but key being I do as best I can to think things through at length before I decide to act on anything at all. I'll have this page watched for the duration of the AfD, so if you have any issues you'd like me to address in particular, please feel free to ask. I'm certainly sorry if I'm taking up extemporaneous amounts of your time on this... Cheers~ ♪ daTheisen (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
That was a funny article! But I deleted the comment in consideration of the user's dignity. He's had a hard enough day. Jehochman Talk 20:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
"the lone deletion argument doesn't hold any weight"? Tim Song ( talk) 23:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
They are all single persons. I will bring written proof, that I received the HEISENBERG AWARD and the 500 000 VOLKSWAGEN FOUNDATION PRIZE, an EB-1 invitation for my whole family, and a book cited 115 times - http://www.ecoscope.com/biomass3.htm - another chapter in book http://www.ecoscope.com/polarbe2.htm, another http://www.ecoscope.com/naturwie.htm . We will obey to the restricktions - Uwe Kils 09:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
But not by me. Please close it. I promised already that we will only use the kils account in the future and that nobody is allowed to work on my IP or machine or name and that I will obey the restrictions. I meant it only good giving information of our UHSE ELITE UNIVERSITY into the public domain, but we have all also on our servers. I have never seen a person behaving like user:cert, not even giving his scientiffic background. I did not "Canvas", I only asked to vote. Nothing else. Uwe Kils 15:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Ta. Peridon ( talk) 18:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
per http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FDiana_Napolis&action=historysubmit&diff=330541616&oldid=330517997, could you provide me with the url where the canvassing was taking place? the point is moot now, as the article has been deleted, but it might undergo deletion review so evidence of canvassing might prove useful. thanks Theserialcomma ( talk) 18:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I was hoping you could take a look at this deletion debate. Someone has written a message claiming the information in the article is libelous (which is stretching it a bit), but I think the debate has mostly run its course, with established editors weighing in with policy, and mainly SPA's providing opinions to keep. Angryapathy ( talk) 19:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you deleted For Fuel Freedom, Inc. because a patent was suppossedly self-promoted. A patent may be written by the inventor or their attorney, but they do happen to go through a more thorough editing and review process than books, and are reviewed by patent examiners with stringent guidelines. And unlike books, that process can take years to review not months. The changes that come about are certainly nothing like what was originally submitted. That is not a "self-published" definition. Please restore the page. EmmettLBrown ( talk) 10:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Novell Forge Password Management Servlets was closed as delete. The page was moved to Password Management Servlets during the AfD. You deleted the redirect but not the content. Can you fix this please by deleting Password Management Servlets? I am sorry for you that this got confused. Thanks for looking into it. Miami33139 ( talk) 19:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
The weekly Policy Report in the Signpost features community feedback on policy pages; see for instance here, here and here. We're putting together another one for the Signpost 9 days from now at WT:Consensus#Signpost Policy Report. I'm asking for your participation because you made an edit within the last two months at that talk page, but all responses are welcome. I'm not watchlisting, so if you have questions or comments, please drop a note at the policy talk page or my user page. Thanks for your time. - Dank ( push to talk) 16:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nathan Keyes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. As an aside, the DRV request was placed on the talkpage of the AfD, you might want to speedy it. treelo radda 18:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Micro 101 here, could you please tell me what I did wrong in my merge? Also, how did you get your user boxes in that handy little window? METAL MAN ( talk) 21:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Hello Fences, I was wondering where you got those pictures and how you put them in your user boxes, please reply at my discussion page here: METAL MAN ( talk) 21:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Sorry about the inadvertent deletion of your comments! No clue how that happened... -- Crusio ( talk) 19:14, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
It's still hanging on at es:wp, despite the propb having expired. Probably not important in this case, but I note that you didn't inform the creator - it's {{subst:Aviso propb|nombre de articulo}} ~~~~ for future reference, if you ever make your way back over there.
Incidentally, looking at old Papa November and Verbal SPIs I notice that you seem to have escaped being accused - I hope you didn't feel left out, probably would have happened eventually. pablo hablo. 23:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the advice on where to get the pictures for the user boxes, but next time can you reply on my page? Thanks! :) Micro 101 ( talk) 00:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Micro 101
Ret.Prof (
talk)
00:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
Hi, If you peruse the Wikispace, you will see that there are pictures in a number of articles, either to illustrate a point, or to add humour. This suggests that there is a consensus that some pictures are OK. Sorry for the controversial picture. I was looking for a reconciliation picture, and the cartoon appeared to show reconciliation. OnBeyondZebrax ( talk) 14:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC) -::Hi,I don't believe I did the Mary Pickford film poster of the two kids beating each other up. Nevertheless, I have put a number of pictures up to illustrate points. Why are you against pictures? Do you think it cheapens the discussion? Other editors seem to agree with the idea of illustrating the Wikispace.
Nice work on narcissism. I dont know if you noticed this : User_talk:AGEdmunds Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Psychology/Self_and_Identity -- Penbat ( talk) 22:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Narcissism is mentioned in bullying article. Narcissism is only in the Bullying template as a related topic. Many bullies are narcissistic. However unfortunately the scientific literature for bullying and narcissism is usually separate and bullying is more of a social construct anyway. -- Penbat ( talk) 23:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC) ( edit conflict):I could tell that was new material. It's a very bitty article generally, it needs some more flow, more coherence, but I don't know enough on the subject to do it myself. Btw, I removed the bullying category, as there's no text in the article to support the connection, but I see from a quick look at the literature that the two are connected, e.g. work by Dieter Zapf. It'd be good to include in the article. Fences& Windows 23:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I mean it ... oddest closure I've seen in weeks. Tx for being principle-based, and crossing the aisle on the del review.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 20:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, Fences & Windows, for your astute opinion and careful work on the Charles J. Fisher and the Charles J. Fisher AfD pages. I will try to update the references according to the LA Times search link you provided. A gold star to you. Wikigratia ( talk) 01:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 14#Category:International Christian Leadership. The category is similar to Category:Members of the Family also known as the Fellowship which you recently commented on. -- Kevinkor2 ( talk) 09:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
What are the advantages/disadvantages to choosing one over the others? I have some ideas regarding that, but others have probably written out theirs already somewhere(s). There's at least one vulnerable stub in the mainspace and a couple deleted articles I'd like the opportunity to review sometime, and I'm not sure where they would best be pondered and worked on. Also, can articles in the mainspace be userfied or incubated w/o going through AfD? Шизомби ( talk) 13:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The Wordsmith
Communicate is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks for supporting my opinion so strongly at the ANI discussion on Shepherd. But I don't actually think it's correct that if I vote to delete , the article is usually hopeless If people thought this way, it would put me in a position of having a practical veto in the subject concerned, and that is not fair to the principle of consensus. What I think it much more sensible to say, and I know is actually what you meant, is that one is convinced by my arguments, not impressed by my predisposition or authority. I am more inclusionist than the average in some subjects, including PROFs in the humanities. and I suppose he can be classified as such. But there are others where I am often more deletionist than the consensus, and that includes non-fiction non-academic books and their writers--which is also relevant here.
I mean this as only a friendly note. I am very glad you ended the foolish AfD & got rid of the article, rather than have another 10 days of nonsense. But you can realize that this sort of thing can end by my being marginalized. DGG ( talk ) 05:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
You seem to like userboxes. Do you by any chance use Windows under duress, or are you a happy camper? {{User OS:Windows Duress}} -- Slashme ( talk)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall. Best Wishes for the Holidays, Jusdafax 06:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
A Nobody
My talk is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 16:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
There's no question which statement caught your attention. For your convenience, it was added here here, then moderated (a bit) here. If either the edit or its revision is actionable, by either statutory or Wikipedia standards, then you'll want those references handy.
I don't know if the revision will be allowed to stand, but for now at least the Google bots have fewer bad words to index. If the statements that concern you precede it in the discussion, though, then I'm afraid they will have to stand until the page is blanked. Yappy2bhere ( talk) 11:42, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Micro 101 here to wish you, Fences and Windows, a very safe, fun, and relaxing new year! What's your resolution?
-- Micro101 ( talk) 15:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
You try and be nice and thats what you get, thanks. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:01, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I've asked for a review of my block of COM at Wikipedia:Ani#Block_review_please. Happy New Year. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)